Scott Adams, author of Dilbert, made an interesting observation about R vs. G rated movies in a recent post:
“A study done in 2005 showed that G-rated movies are 11 times more profitable than R-rated movies, yet the industry cranks out 12-times more R-rated movies.” [from Scott Adams]
More info on the study in question can be found here – rwurl.com/cnngstudy.
What’s up with that? Scott suggests its the pursuit of Oscars motivating producers and directors. Anyone know the ratio of G to R rated Academy winners or nominees?
In other news…
“For the past 18 months, my syndication company, United Media, and I had been negotiating with a major movie studio to do a Dilbert movie. They wanted to do it. We wanted to do it. A top director wanted to do it. We even agreed on price. But that wasn’t enough to get it done, for reasons that have already appeared in a Dilbert comic. (I can’t tell you which one.) So the movie rights for Dilbert are available.” [from Scott Adams]
Huh. Read the plot line idea that Adam’s puts forward and you may have an idea why this isn’t being filmed yet. IMHO, The Simpsons is one of the few series (in any medium) without a coherent, cross-series plot arc to make the jump to the big screen successfully.